UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7022

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WENDY BENS,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
William D. Quarles, Jr., District
Judge. (1:04-cr-00040-WDQ-2; 1:10-cv-3003-WDQ)

Submitted:

December 20, 2011

Decided:

December 23, 2011

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wendy Bens, Appellant Pro Se.

John Walter Sippel, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, James G. Warwick, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:
Wendy Bens seeks to appeal the district courts order
construing

his

motion

for

dismissal

of

indictment

as

successive motion under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2010) and

denying Bens motion for reconsideration of a prior order.

We

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice

of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a
party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty
days after the entry of the district courts final judgment or
order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court
extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or
reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).
timely

filing

of

notice

of

jurisdictional requirement.

appeal

in

civil

case

[T]he
is

Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205,

214 (2007).
The district courts order was entered on the docket
on

December

10,

August 1, 2011.

2010.

The

notice

of

appeal

was

filed

on

Because Bens failed to file a timely notice of

appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal

period, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
appeal.
legal

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

contentions

are

adequately

presented

in

the

materials

before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.
DISMISSED